click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130318
20130326
STATION
CSPAN 8
CSPAN2 2
LANGUAGE
English 20
Search Results 0 to 19 of about 20 (some duplicates have been removed)
years of presidential press conferences. commemoratell another anniversary. president ronald reagan and his star wars defense initiative. "washington journal" continues. we are back in a moment. >> we could take pictures of the ans and seemri sc the whole thing. there is an enormous gap about how the surface of the brain function to be able to move my hand or to look at u.n. process the information or to lay down a memory. we do not know how that works. a lot of this will be technology development. a lot of it will be nano- technology. we want to look at london's of thousands of brain cells at the same time to understand -- look at hundreds of thousands of plant cells at the same time. we do not have a scientific plan about milestones. it is getting to be an exciting moment to put something together that we cannot have thought of. nih director on c-span plus some "q & a." ofyou have been out commission since 2006. the chairman has been on since 2009. will we expect some turnover with the commission? >> we all have staggered terms. the past years have flown by quickly. we will see. i
and not an election year liability? >> i work for ronald reagan. he compromised on everything. we had a democratic house with a huge majority. he had to. the real divided government can work. ronald reagan proved it could work. clinton proved it could work. those are guys who got huge legislation enacted. the reagan economic plan, immigration reform, social security reform -- here is the thing -- the president has got to lead. >> i would say this is not the season -- compromise is not in the air. but i think that the republicans in the house realize it is in their political interest to turn the heat down and not have a food fight every few weeks for the american public. what i think is in the air and is happening is people from the far left and the far right are starting to come together against institutions and the governing parties, and you will see more of that. you saw it last week with the drones. you will see it with the banks on wall street. businesses that are impacted by the federal government in terms of getting money. there is increasingly from the left and right a coming together again
movement to get elected and then feign shock when conservatives call them out for bad policy. ronald reagan cemented our values with his analogy -- that conservativism stands for free enterprise, strong national defense, and pro-family social policies. if you take one leg away from the stool, the stool crumbles. if we sell out our principles then the conservative movementthose in the establishment who claim they know how to win are simply living a lie. just look at the past two presidential campaigns. how did that work out for the establishment? only in 2010, when our conservative grassroots were fully mobilized, hand in hand with the tea party did we prevail. last month the battle lines were drawn when karl rove and company announced to "the new york times," of all places, they were forming the conservative victory project. the conservative victory project is nothing more than an attempt by the establishment to control the conservative movement. calling it the conservative victory project is like mitt romney saying he was a severe conservative. tol rove claims he wants win. why does he thi
. >> let me quote dick cheney, who said ronald reagan taught us that deficits do not matter. dick cheney was wrong. he was wrong then and now. of course deficits matter, but any one of you who supported the bush plans has no right to speak. i helped bill clinton balance the budget and build a surplus. why? because we had good economic times. in good economic times, you pay down the deficit, but reagan and bush did not, and in bad you have to stimulate in the near term, as thank god president obama is doing. we democrats will balance the budget once again. >> paul, which is more important to america's pursuit of happiness -- which is more dangerous, excuse me, than a 357 magnum -- >> in my home you would find 17 guns and no cans of soda pop. i have the right wing position on the giant drink soda thing. i do not like the idea, and i think bloomberg is a fine man, but i do not like government telling us what size to buy today. this one, i am with tucker and most of you. i have the right wing position on gun safety. i have the same position as ronald reagan, who was for a waiting period befo
's not certainly the same thing that he believed. and we brought up the spector of ronald reagan and he had three legs to that republican stool back then, the christian he coalition, you have the defense hawks, but you also have the small government libertarians and ronald reagan didn't preach small government because we can't afford it, but big government into the lives of american people is against the founding document. the republicans lost the argument against big government because suddenly we could afford it and look where we are now. >> megyn: it doesn't seem that rand paul is on different footing when it comes to small government. he's on different footing when it comes to foreign affairs and our military intervention. >> well, both of those positions are rooted in a constitutional argument. you can make nuanced arguments when it comes to the drone strike, you're getting lost if you thought the filibuster for 12 hours was about drones. rather seeing a republican senator stand up against the executive branch and he did something that the brilliant minds of the republican caucus had not bee
to have come to washington to work in a very minor role for ronald reagan and some of us are proud to have supported the bush administration after 9/11 and fighting epimieses and the problem with the obama administration is not that it is too assertive. the problem is that we are retreating all around the world and unfortunately emboldening our enemies. if rand paul wants to run to the left of the obama administration he is tree to ned ahat in the republican minute. maybe this is more is support for that than i think but i doubt there really is. >> chris: nina, the president thinks bringing the troops home not in a rush but steadily and eventually is a winning message in the last campaign, frankly not talking about open-ended commitments. does the gop need to recognize and respond to a war weariness in the country? >> i think the drone issue and war we areness are two totally different issues. rand paul's war and drones is a war on a pretty successful fight against terrorism right now. i'm not sure where that gets us. i agree with bill that the gop doesn't lose by being a strong party of n
, they say that was the one thing ronald reagan gave away when he liberalized a lot of policies on this and effectively allowed illegal immigrants to stay here. he didn't get the other part of the bargain he thought he had made and that was to tight 'security. this could be a real mess. >> the bottom line really about immigration reform is congress can pass it, but it depends on the executive branch to enforce it. so i think what we saw in this hearing this week is that republicans are becoming increasingly worried the department of homeland security doesn't really want tone force -- to enforce it and it's going to give them pause before the vote. >> neil: this whole healthcare debate that is kicking up approaching the third anniversary of the health care law, news that premiums are doubling, on top of double-diagnose increased that have become in the norm. we can remember it was billed -- we were told things would terriblize, premiums would go down. that might still happen. but it isn't happening now. how serious is this getting? >> could be very serious. you could be talking a
of ronald reagan and stop conservatism and just go back to the good old truth that is worked back then, that reagan laid for the incredible ground work of the economy in the 1980's and 1990's. clinton helped to some extent, ut then he created and repealed glass-steagall, and everybody blames it on george bush. the conservatives who didn't do much for the letter peace, we tried to expand under karl rove, the voting process, and giving more to hispanic community, and we didn't get one increase in vote in that eight-year period so. what makes you think that we're going to give amnesty and all the set get a bunch of votes? it's fraud, and it's another really ploy by the democratic party to keep promising and benefits to everybody who will vote for them no matter what. scommoip we're going to talk about immigration in our next segment of the "washington journal" today. but we still have about five minutes left in this segment, if you want to call in to give us your take on this growth and opportunities report that was released today, or if you think hanges in the republican debates would ha
for ronald reagan. he compromised on everything. we had a democratic house with a huge majority. he had to. the real divided government can work. ronald reagan proved it could work. clinton proved it could work. those are guys who got huge legislation enacted. the reagan economic plan, immigration reform, social security reform -- here is the thing -- the president has got to lead. for four years we have had a president was not willing to take that kind of leadership to make congress work. i hope he will this term. >> i would say this is not the season -- compromise is not in the air. but i think that the republicans in the house realize it is in their political interest to turn the heat down and not have a food fight every few weeks for the american public. what i think is in the air and is happening is people from the far left and the far right are starting to come together against institutions and the governing parties, and you will see more of that. you saw it last week with the drones. you will see it with the banks on wall street. businesses that are impacted by the federal governmen
ronald reagan say? >> mr. gorbachev, tear that wall down. >> what does bill clinton say? >> i did not have relations with that woman. >> very good. what does john f. kennedy say? >> ask not what you can do for your country -- ask not what you can do for your country. >> pretty good. >> but -- >> okay. what does george w. bush -- >> but ask what your country can do for you. >> okay. what does george w. bush say? >> [inaudible] >> what does george h. bush say? >> read my lips. no new taxes. >> what does our main man, barack obama, say? >> yes, we can! yes, we can! yes, we can! yes, we can! >> very good. >>brian: ladies and gentlemen, a two-year-old. that's incredible. >>anna: we've got to get this kid on the show. >>steve: he got a little hung up on what john f. kennedy said but he knew exactly what bill clinton said. >>brian: unbelievable. i don't know if he know what bill clinton said. >>steve: he knew the line. >>brian: he even knew how to count. incredible. >>anna: 6:34. to your news headline. senate majority leader harry reid con conceding duet on the democrats -- con seethe de
bush or ronald reagan, correct me colonel north, if i'm wrong, you worked for president reagan, i can't see a president doing nothing time and time again and the only people he seems to be nice to are radicals like mohammed morsi? >> and the united nations. what we've done, we've gone to the united nations well so many time, and what he's done is allowed himself and believe that the united nations was going to stop the north koreans, inter-continental ballistic missiles. they've done it and unless we say carefully, if you have a business that's doing business with either of these two countries, you cannot do business with the united states. >> sean: colonel north, let me ask you this, do you think the world by these acts of aggression, and that's how i view them. do you think they perceive barack obama as weak? >> what they're hoping for is american leadership from the front and they're not getting it today. >> nobody thinks america is weak and anybody who does needs to look at what we did in afghanistan. we put men on the ground, we put our money behind it and we've accomplished our
covering since ronald reagan. and the first interview was al-arabi al-arabiya. and in cairo talked about a new beginning between the united states and muslim world. i think we've seen pan out a muslim brotherhood government in control and we misread the arab spring and the muslim brotherhood said they wouldn't run someone for president and they did. we've seen hamas stronger as well as hezbollah, islamic jihad. and we've seen incredibly unstable situation in syria. when i was there on a congressional visit and we sat down with president netanyahu, one thing he asked, he was concerned about iran and the dominance and occurred and we have the iranian guard in syria. and their march toward having the nuclear device so they can have dominance. >> sean: that's all true and it's gotten worse, leslie, after the suck up to the world apology tour. and king be abdullah, jordan, says it's naive, that the muslim brotherhood are wolves in sheep's clothing, risky for him. and this president is giving 1.5 billion dollars, and f-16 jets and tanks it a guy that views the israelis as the descendents of ap
. in the 80's college campuses were very liberal but lots of young people liked ronald reagan answered obviously had two terms in the white house. i guess i disagree with that idea. in fact, on college campuses today i think kids are pretty conservative. >> bill: here is why you are desperately wrong, juan. two wreensz. anti-vietnam was a very narrow cast. and you and i were in college at the time. it was centered on the vietnam war. it took a lot of colleges by surprise, the we hem nens of it there wasn't before that a history of left wing faculties. some were, some weren't. now, the very people who were protesting are running the college campuses. many have not eradicated their point of view. university of minnesota had recently put bill ayers, the guy who literally planted bombs in the 1960's on their faculty. >> right. >> bill: on their faculty. >> i try point out to people the ludicrousness of that the actual literal analog unrepentant abortion clinic bomber were teaching humanities course. would we think that was insane? >> bill: it would never happen in a million years in this c
of "ronald reagan: the power of conviction and the success of his presidency," a great book which should be read by every student of the u.s. presidency. of "competitive equity: a better way to organize mutual funds." "privatizing fannie may, freddie mac and the home loan banks," we're still working on that, and "the gap gap." here's our book. i hope you read this whole book, but in case you're intimidated by the thickness of it, please in any case read the closing chapter on the burdens and blunders of the dodd-frank act. it is a succinct, compelling case for the prosecution with dodd-frank in the doc to which the jury of time will surely respond guilty and the judge pronounce sentence, string 'em up. peter will present his book. in about 25 minutes we'll have three discussants, we'll give peter a chance to respond and some discussion among the panel, then we'll open the floor to your questions. and at 1:45, unless we run out of questions sooner, we'll adjourn to a coffee reception. copies of peter's book are available at no cost. should we run out and you don't have one yet, you can si
the definition. but what i'd say -- i'd say what we have now is de facto amnesty. jon: yeah, the fact is ronald reagan signed the legislation in the mid '80s that was going to fix the immigration problem once and for all, and here we are 20 years lateerer, more than that, with, you know, 11 and 12 million illegal immigrants in this country. >> well, those events of the '80s still haunt the immigration debate today. an amnesty was given out, the border was not secured, and in the 2000s, especially under the administration of george push, there was a huge increase in the number of illegal immigrants. the one thing republicans do agree on is they need to do something about this. even the ones who think border security only is the way to go, they all feel they have to do something about it. the problem just cannot continue to exist as it has for the last decade. jon: well, and the speeches, maybe the presidential campaign speeches continue. we'll see how long it takes to get some legislative language out there. byron york, thank you. >> thank you, jon. jenna: well, a major american city dealing wit
to. the real divided government can work. ronald reagan proved it could work. clinton proved it could work. those are guys who got huge legislation enacted. the reagan economic plan, immigration reform, social security reform --here is the thing -- the president has got to lead. for four years we have had a president was not willing to take that kind of leadership to make congress work. i hope he will this term. >> i would say this is not the season -- compromise is not in the air. but i think that the republicans in the house realize it is in their political interest to turn the heat down and not have a food fight every few weeks for the american public. what i think is in the air and is happening is people from the far left and the far right are starting to come together against institutions and the governing parties, and you will see more of that. you saw it last week with the drones. you will see it with the banks on wall street. byinesses that are impacted the federal government in terms of getting money. there is increasingly from the left and right a coming together against the
's been. right now already, it's the highest this rate has been since ronald reagan inherited a disastrous tax code from jimmy carter. that was a long time ago. of course, that doesn't include the state and local taxes which put many americans today at a top marginal tax rate of over 50%, where government is taking over half of the income that they are earning, and our friends who are introducing this budget are suggesting that all this isn't enough. we need yet another big tax increase. in fact, we need a giant one. $1.5 trillion over the next ten years in new additional taxes. i've got news for you. i don't see how this can probably be done without significant tax increases on middle-class americans. i know some folks in this chamber like to suggest that can all be done just by soaking the rich again. we just go back to soaking rich folks again. i will give you an example why i don't think that can work. the president made out in his budget last year his plan for a new whole round of taxes on wealthy americans on top of the tax increase that occurred 11 weeks ago, and he specified how he
Search Results 0 to 19 of about 20 (some duplicates have been removed)